There was a big axis.
peace,
I have a question about the opinion of the Minims. The Rabbi in the Laws of Repentance mentions the method that your God was a great painter who found signs and from them he painted the world.
There is a primordial material from which God created the world.
But I wonder why the species didn’t follow Spinoza’s idea and say that that Julian substance is God and even has free choice so that the world was created in this way and not otherwise. That way they could exclude beings that are not necessary for the obvious.
B. Does the Rabbi think that energy could serve an appropriate role for this purpose or is it quite deterministic ?
- His being a painter is a Midrash of the Sages (see Berakhot 10:1 and more). The interpretation that the hyolic material is ancient is the Minut.
2. The Midrash says that God created the world using the hyolitic matter, so what you are proposing is certainly not an interpretation of the Midrash. Beyond that, it is possible that they were not willing to accept that the world was created by God Himself. And the hyolitic matter is matter and not an entity with choice and/or intelligence. And if it has choice and intelligence, then it is God. What is the species here? But I am really running out of explanations for the system of unknown species. Why is this important?
B. I don’t understand. Energy created the world? How is that better than primitive matter? See all my answers above.
The point here is that it is not completely abstract.
This question occurred to me why you do not interpret the physico-theological view as God being energy itself as having a choice. We have no real objection to assuming that energy has the power not to act in this way. And we have no reason to assume that matter does not have a choice.#
So that, in addition to Occam's razor, this is the proper understanding to assume so.
2. Is it even scientifically possible to claim this or is it a complete lack of understanding of the concept of energy?
# Until today, we have viewed matter as deterministic because this was its will, but this is not a problem in fact.
I answered. If energy is a being with intelligence and choice (and it is not), then it is God.
Why doesn't the Rabbi assume so?
General emotional intuition or a more well-founded reason..?
What am I assuming? I don't see any assumption here.
I explained in my notebook that the proof doesn't go into the question of who the entity called God is. We proved that there is an entity that created the world and its laws, and it's called God. So if it also happens to be energy or matter or a frog, it really doesn't matter.
If you asked about me, I assumed that energy has no intelligence or choice. It's like assuming that the chair next to me or the stone in the yard doesn't have any of those. Energy is part of physics and it does what the laws of physics require.
In fact, if I assume that energy has consciousness, then I must also assume that the chair has consciousness? Does this come from Einstein's laws?
The reason I have a reason to think so. Is that energy sounds like a rather abstract and 'spiritual' thing to use in this role. Or am I wrong because I have no real fiscal knowledge.
From what I understand from your words, you do not assume that the chair has consciousness because you believe that we have external mental awareness.
And you do not 'see' that all materials have consciousness like you do, as you believe that buildings do.
And because you believe that there cannot be something at the macro level that does not have a basis at the micro level, you assume that there is a non-material entity for you and other buildings. Am I right?
Forgive me, but I'm tired. As far as I'm concerned, the matter has been explained to the point of bloodshed.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
